That is very interesting. I don't know anything about Density Functional Theory (DFT). I did a bit of research on DFT, and I don't get how they get around the complexity of the exploding degrees of freedom in wave mechanics. I understand the approach of limiting yourself to three coordinates, but I don't get how that trick works.Quote from Mav88:
nitro, yes we do know how to model them and it works quite well. Density Functional Theory in fact models quite complicated organics with many nuclei. It's numerical, but it works.
Here's the problem: What you meant was 'closed form solution' does not exist, but since you are desperate to extroplate any little bit of scientific uncertainty to the conclusion that your own version of a god exists, then you take huge liberties with the little knowledge you have. I would also stop listening to quacks and try and find the better voices of the mainstream.
Assuming though that even if your statement is correct, you take it as some sort of evidence for your point of view. Fallacy of the HUGE excluded middle.
Exe: "Some scientists question... {fill in the blank with your favorite coclusion}, therefore MY religion is correct." is not logically true
As to the rest of your response, no such thing is true. I have no idea whether GOD exists or not, but God almost certainly does not. (You will have to search old posts to understand my distinction.) There is a great deal of mystery to me about the world that seems almost impossible to accept as random. However, given enough time, anything is possible, even scientifically. If our universe is cyclic, then it is possible that the "universe" cycles different physics on each cycle, making it fantastically old (time may have no meaning from universe to universe, but probabilities do.) So who knows, it could all be some accident...